Where's the scrutiny? (LT)

[MassNole]

Quote: Originally Posted by CheeseBoy

Don't post facts. No matter what the other teams needs were and no matter how good the other prospects looked they still shoukd've drafted LT. Plain and simple. Even though the Falcons needed a QB.....and Davis looked like a future LT star...and Bengals didn't need a RB....they still should've drafted him.

LMAO

Well, the Browns have no excuse. Who knows what taking LT would've done for Tim Couch's career.

[CheeseBoy]

Only team that has no excuse is the Browns even though Warren looked like a pretty good prospect too

[rudyjuly2]

Quote: Originally Posted by The Soldier

Completely disagree. Drafting LT would have been the worst move the Bengals could have made. You're the worst franchise in the NFL, going 11-37 over the previous 3 years and have a #4 pick. But on the positive, you have the best RB in the NFL. There's no logical reason the Bengals would draft the only position they excell at. That'd be like the Chargers trading up next year to get McFadden or the Cards drafting Quinn.

How on earth could drafting one of the best RBs in the NFL over the past 20 years be a horrible move? Would LT or Justin Smith be better for that franchise? It never hurts to have a second great RB due to injuries. Don't forget that Corey did have some injury issues and character issues shortly after that. The Bengals got rid of him three years later and he wasn't close to the back LT was in his first few years in the league. Long term thinking would have definately helped Cinci if they took LT. Its the short-term knee jerk reaction to filling needs that often results in wasted picks at the top of the draft imo which is one reason the Bengals sucked.

Trading up would be stupid of the Chargers to get McFadden (who can't come out anyway). The Cards drafting Quinn might not be so bad. The Cowboys once had Troy Aikman and Steve Walsh on their team and traded one away. My point is if LT was the best player on the board at the time they should take him. Same if it means the Cardinals taking Brady Quinn. If you pass on superior talent, you get a situation like Houston who passed on both Bush and Vince Young because they thought they had capable players in Dominack Davis and David Carr. Passing on a superior talent for an inferior one based on need is a mistake at the top of the draft. Either trade down and get extra picks or take the best player. You can always trade someone as well (like Corey Dillon). Its in the best long term interest of a franchise to maximize the talent as opposed to plugging holes. It usually falls into place down the road anyway.

[CheeseBoy]

He's saying that it would be the worst move they could've made AT THE TIME. Geez.

[sroz39]

Quote: Originally Posted by ehh

As for the original topic, I think people in general accept the notion that most football front offices are filled with morons who can't draft so there's no point in scrutinizing them. All the stuff at the combine, etc, I think it's reached a point where people over-analyze every player and out think themselves. Last April was a perfect example, the Texans passing on Reggie Bush? C'mon now.

Agree with you 110%. Scouts forget about the main thing...can the guy play. These guys seem to try an justify their existence by analyzing every last thing. When all that should really matter is how a player preformed in a game situation.

[Cebby]

Quote:

How on earth could drafting one of the best RBs in the NFL over the past 20 years be a horrible move?

BECAUSE THEY HAD THE SECOND BEST RB IN FOOTBALL AND COMPLETELY SUCKED AT ALMOST EVERY SINGLE OTHER POSITION. The only good players they had on the entire team were Dillion, Willie Anderson, and Takeo Spikes.

Quote:

It never hurts to have a second great RB due to injuries.

No it doesn't. And teams like New England, Indy, Cinci now, Dallas, and Chicago can work on depth. Cinci didn't need depth, they needed 15+ starters.

Quote:

The Bengals got rid of him three years later and he wasn't close to the back LT was in his first few years in the league. Long term thinking would have definately helped Cinci if they took LT. Its the short-term knee jerk reaction to filling needs that often results in wasted picks at the top of the draft imo which is one reason the Bengals sucked.

He went downhill after LT was drafted, but he was still a 2 time pro bowler. There was zero reason to drafting LT at the time. And before anyone brings up Bush and Duece, Duece was already getting hurt and dropping off, plus Bush was a threat AT THE TIME at WR and PR. AT THE TIME, nobody knew LT was going to be catching balls. In college combined he had 236 yards recieving in 4 years.

Quote:

If you pass on superior talent, you get a situation like Houston who passed on both Bush and Vince Young because they thought they had capable players in Dominack Davis and David Carr.

Huge difference between "capable" and Dillon in 2000. Dillon was coming off 2 pro bowl seasons (and about to add a third) and was exactly what LT was from 01-03.

And criticizing Cinci's draft that year is stupid. They got Justin Smith, Ocho Cinco, Rudi, and TJ.

[rudyjuly2]

Quote: Originally Posted by The Soldier

BECAUSE THEY HAD THE SECOND BEST RB IN FOOTBALL AND COMPLETELY SUCKED AT ALMOST EVERY SINGLE OTHER POSITION. The only good players they had on the entire team were Dillion, Willie Anderson, and Takeo Spikes. And criticizing Cinci's draft that year is stupid. They got Justin Smith, Ocho Cinco, Rudi, and TJ.

I never felt Corey Dillon was ever the second best RB in football in any given year. He was good not great. We'll just have to disagree about how good Dillon was.

Second, I never criticized their other draft selections that year. I criticized the decision to draft Smith over LT.

Quote: Originally Posted by cheeseboy

He's saying that it would be the worst move they could've made AT THE TIME. Geez.

This is my point though. You can't simply make the draft decision based on "AT THE TIME". Its a very short sighted philosophy that can limit you. Only worrying about next year when a guy like LT could be a great player for ten years is a poor philosophy imo. Long term, its best to add the best players even if you may not always need them for the next year (or trade down to acquire extra picks and then pick where value=need). Picking superior talent over need will usually result in you having a better team in the long haul. Cinci could have always traded Dillon at his peak if LT panned out and drafting LT still would have been the right decision. At the very least, nobody here can argue that LT would have been a better pick than Justin Smith knowing what we do now.

[CheeseBoy]

Good lord..let me explain again. The Bengals had noone but Dillon and Willie. NOONE. So why would they draft a position that is their only strength